April 01, 2007
|
Daniel Craig saves James Bond from infinite boredom.Since I'm not what you'd call a "James Bond" fanatic, the idea of yet another ho-hum entry in the long-running franchise didn't interest me in the least. The casting of Daniel Craig was interesting, I suppose, due in part to the controversy brought on by those who thought the charming Brit was "too ugly" for the lead role. Even the brilliant idea of going back to the original novel for some much-needed inspiration left me yawning and heavy-lidded. It seemed like a lame cash-in, a shady scheme to earn some easy cash. Needless to say, the film had a few strikes against it from the get-go. What can I say? I'm a deliciously fickle film fiend with very poor taste in movies. I thought you knew?
Get with the program, people!
Because of my sinister preconceived notions about Martin Campbell's Casino Royale redux, I deftly avoided seeing the picture in theaters, much to the dismay of my co-workers at the time. One jolly soul in particular couldn't understand why, exactly, I wouldn't want to waste my entertainment dollar on the latest installment of a series I really couldn't care less about. To avoid an uncomfortable moment between the two of us, I told him I was allergic to sexy British men with dreamy eyes and strong jawlines. Though the look he gave me was peculiar, I think he understood. I'd like to think so, anyway.
Oddly enough, I became completely obsessed with seeing the film somewhere between its dollar theater exhibition and the eventual DVD release. Countless television interviews with star Daniel Craig coupled with an array of exciting footage from the film suddenly piqued my interest, leaving me feverish and foaming for its forthcoming retail due date. But instead of renting or purchasing the film myself, I patiently waited for my father-in-law to pick up a copy so I could borrow it from him. Take that, MPAA!
Chinese bootleggers ain't got nothin' on father-in-laws!
All joking aside, Casino Royale is probably one of the most satisfying films I've seen in the past few months. It's literally stuffed from top to bottom with jaw-dropping action sequences that rival some of the stuff coming out of Hong Kong right now. To sweeten the deal, director Martin Campbell and no less than three Hollywood screenwriters -- including professional hack Paul Haggis -- have crafted an engaging storyline that transplants the original concept into the modern world, complete with an abundance of nifty cellular phones and plenty of extravagant automobiles. It's something I never expected to like as much as I do. Seriously.
Seriously!
The film follows a lean and hungry James Bond as he starts his career as a "00" agent, starting with the two nasty assassinations required by his covert employers. Soon our hero is blowing up foreign embassies and winning luxury cars in high-stakes poker games, much to the head-shaking disapproval of his motherly boss M (Judi Dench). However, his skills at poker will come in quite handy when he is forced to participate in a multi-million dollar tournament against the villainous Le Chiffre, a milky-eyed terrorist who is looking to quickly recoup a large sum of money he recently lost thanks to Mr. Bond. Trust me when I say it's much more entertaining than my lousy synopsis suggests.
Martin Campbell -- who directed Ray Liotta in the cheesy guilty pleasure No Escape way back in 1994 -- seems to understand how action movies are suppose to operate. He definitely knows how to restrain himself; the film's oh-so intense thrills are balanced nicely with a number of genuinely touching moments that never seem gratuitous or overblown. The opening chase sequence sets the tone perfectly while giving you a good hard look at what the new James Bond is more than capable of. Craig jumps, falls, bounces, runs and shoots his way into your heart by the fifteen minute mark, effectively squashing those bothersome notions I talked about earlier. You're the man, Craig!
In fact, I'd go as far as to say that Daniel Craig is the main reason to see the film. The story is engaging and frequently surprising, yes, but it's Craig's no-nonsense performance that helps keep the proceedings planted firmly on the ground. His Bond is flawed and inexperienced, prone to making huge mistakes in the field. Futhermore, you can actually feel the character grow over the course of the film, a trait sorely missing from the other "classic" entries. Bond actually comes across like a flesh and blood human being this time around, as opposed to a martini-swilling slimeball with a perpetual hard-on that always seems to stumble into deep trouble.
I guess the main reason I love Casino Royale so passionately is the same as the one that may rub hardcore fans the wrong way: This just doesn't feel like your father's James Bond. It's gritty, mean-spirited, and incredibly entertaining without feeling forced or desperate for attention. Martin Campbell has done a fine job with the material, delivering one of the most satisfying action flicks of 2006 and the best 007 film in history with one fell swoop. Daniel Craig should put those blog-happy naysayers in a vicious choke hold until they turn purple and poop themselves for saying such naughty things about him. It might be disturbing to watch, but I'll help in any way I can.
As long as he holds me in the shower afterwards, that is.
1 Spasms:
I completely agree that this is the most satisfying films for me too. The action sequences are really amazing. Highly relevant, efficient advertising to forum, blog, wiki and other types of web sites. Drive large number of visitors to your website and build quality links. http://www.widecircles.com
Post a Comment